SCMR 1988

1988 PLP 302 (SCMR)

Mst. JANNAT BIBI — Petitioner Versus NOORA and 4 others — Respondents

Jurisdiction / Court
High Court
Decided Date
Criminal Petition No.61 of 1981, decided on 7th November, 1987.
Honorable Judges
Shafiur Rahman, Zaffar Hussain Mirza and
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 1988 PLP 302 (SCMR)
Forum / Court High Court
Bench Members Shafiur Rahman, Zaffar Hussain Mirza and
Parties Mst. JANNAT BIBI — Petitioner Versus NOORA and 4 others — Respondents
Primary Law (a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860), (b) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)
💡 Quick Legal QA & Summary / سوال و جواب خلاصہ
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1988 PLP 302 (SCMR)?

This judgment primarily cites: (a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860), (b) Penal Code (XLV of 1860) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.

Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1988 PLP 302 (SCMR)?

The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: Shafiur Rahman, Zaffar Hussain Mirza and.

Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?

Cite this legal precedent as: 1988 PLP 302 (SCMR) (Mst. JANNAT BIBI — Petitioner Versus NOORA and 4 others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Laws Cited

(a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860) (b) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)

Representation

  • Ch. Muhammad Anwar Bhinder, Advocate Supreme Court for Petitioner.
  • Ijaz Hussain Batalvi, Senior Advocate Supreme Court with M.A.Zafar, Advocate Supreme Court and Mohammad Aslam, Advocate- on-Record for Respondents.
  • Date of hearing: 7th November, 1987.
  • Altaf Mohammad Khan, Advocate Supreme Court for the State.

Headnotes / Summary

(Against the judgment and order dated 12-1-1981 of the Lahore High Court, Lahore, in Criminal Appeal No.668/79).

S.302/34--Constitution of Pakistan (1973). Art. 185(3)--Appeal against acquittal-- Appraisal of evidence--Identification of culprits- Dark night occurrence--Motive and presence of lantern to facilitate identification of accused, disbelieved--Prosecution failing to establish its case against accused beyond any shadow of doubt--Acquittal by High Court by giving benefit of doubt, challenged--View of evidence taken by High Court not in violation of any principle or provision of law--Point urged relating only to appraisal of evidence--Leave to appeal refused.

S.302--Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 185(3)--Identification of assailants to be established beyond doubt--Appeal against acquittal--Accused given benefit of doubt--Dark night occurrence- Prosecution witness identifying assailants in light of lantern and coming to know of their names and addresses afterwards--Plea that natural witnesses had opportunity to witness occurrence and to identify accused, repelled--Held: Such an identification without an identification parade which could link it with the accused would not be sufficient- Leave to appeal refused. Altaf Mohammad Khan, Advocate Supreme Court for the State.

Judgment & Decree

SHAFIUR RAHMAN, J.--The petitioner, a complainant, seeks leave to appeal against the judgment of the Lahore High Court dated the 12th of January, 1981 whereby the five respondents convicted of the offences under sections 302/149, 148 and 458 P.P.C. were acquitted of the charges and ordered to be released forthwith. The sentence of death awarded to Noora was not confirmed. Mst. Jannat (P.W.11) was, according to the prosecution case, engaged to Noora, respondent No. 1 but the engagement was not honoured and she was married to Haq Nawaz, the deceased about five months before the occurrence. On the night of 5th/6th September, 1979, the family of Haq Nawaz was asleep in their house in village Mandhora Kalan at the distance of six miles from the Police Station Jalalpur Bhattian, District Gujranwala. At night Mst. Jannat Bibi (PW.9) his sister was awakened by the foot-steps of a number of persons who had scaled over the wall and entered the courtyard. There was a lantern in whose light Mst. Janat Bibi (PW.9) identified the accused though she came to know about their names and addresses afterwards. Ali, respondent had caught hold of the deceased by the legs and Shera by the arms when Noora respondent inflicted hatchet blows. So did Khan and Mansha. The deceased expired at the spot. A report about the occurrence was lodged the next day at 7 a.m. The respondents denied their participation in the occurrence or the engagement of Mst. Jannat with Noora and their grievance on account of her marriage with Haq Nawaz. The High Court examined the evidence in depth and disbelieved the motive and the presence of the lantern to facilitate the identification and came to the conclusion as hereunder

"Apparently, it was a dark night and the occurrence took place at the later part of the night while the deceased was asleep. In such circumstances, if the culprits or assailants had come with the intention to murder the deceased, it was unnatural on their part that two of them should hold the arms and legs of the deceased while the others inflicted hatchet injuries on the upper part of his body. It is reasonably probable that the deceased was incapacitated to raise alarm with the first blow and then the subsequent blows were given. While the deceased was done to death without having any opportunity of raising alarm, the assailants managed to escape unidentified and unwitnessed." Finally, the learned Judges of the High Court concluded as follows:

"In the light of the above discussion, we are convinced in our mind that the prosecution has not succeeded in establishing its case as against the appellants beyond any shadow of doubt and the benefit of doubt should have been given to them which we hereby give to the appellants. The result is that their convictions as well as sentences awarded to them are hereby set aside and they are acquitted." The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the witnesses produced at the trial were natural witnesses, the mother and the sister and motive stood proved by the wife of the deceased. They had the opportunity to witness the occurrence and to identify the respondents. It is admittedly a night occurrence. It was a dark night. The identification of the assailants had, therefore, to be established beyond reasonable doubt. In the case in hand Mst. Jannat Bibi (P.W.9) admitted that she not only identified them by the face but she came to know about their names and addresses afterwards. Such an identification without an identification parade which could link it with the accused would not be sufficient. Besides, the view of the evidence taken by the High Court does not appear to be in violation of any principle of law or any provision of it. It is only a question of appraisal of evidence. We do not consider it a fit case for leave to appeal which is hereby refused. M.I./J-16/S Petition dismissed.